A proposal for more friendly and informative Proposition 65 Warnings that is being circulated by the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) has garnered the interest of state regulators.
The proposal specifically aims to allow the use of tailored warnings for Proposition 65 reproductive toxicants to replace what the association describes as the “alarming” and “inflammatory” language required under the current warning regulation.
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) officials met with AHPA President Michael McGuffin who presented the organization’s proposal in a meeting held at CalEPA headquarters on Sept 25.
“Proposition 65 warning language, at least for foods and personal care items, should be informative and as emotionally neutral as possible, McGuffin said.
“The AHPA proposal will make Proposition 65 warnings for Proposition 65-listed reproductive toxicants easier to understand for consumers because they instruct the product should not be use by those populations that may be affected by exposure,” he added.
The current warning language required by the statute does not make distinctions about sub-populations, with the exception of warnings specifically for pregnant women warning of the potential hazards of consuming alcoholic beverages.
The standard warning language for Proposition 65 reproductive toxicants is: Warning: This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.
The AHPA proposal would allow for more targeted and relevant warnings such as:
Warning: Not for use by pregnant or nursing women. OR Warning: Not for use by children, pregnant or nursing women or men or women who are trying to conceive.
According to McGuffin, AHPA’s proposal would conform with and satisfy the intent of Proposition 65 by ensuring consumers receive “clear and reasonable” warnings relevant to potential exposures.
According to AHPA, OEHHA staff has expressed “significant interest” in the association’s proposal. The agency has requested that AHPA, with the assistance of its counsel, Trent Norris of Arnold & Porter provide recommendations on how to incorporate the revised warnings into Proposition 65 regulations.
McGuffin said if the proposal succeeds “it would be a win for consumers and companies selling food and personal care items in California.”